Search

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately impacted lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBTQ+) people. Despite developing safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines, LGBTQ+ communities still faces challenges due to inequitable access and vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy is a delay in the acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite the availability of vaccination services. Various studies have explored and tried to address factors influencing vaccine hesitancy. However, the LGBTQ+ population remains under- and misrepresented in many of these studies. According to the few studies that have focused on the LGBTQ+ population, several factors influencing vaccine hesitancy have been identified, with the most common factors in studies being concern about vaccine safety, vaccine efficacy, and history of bad experiences with healthcare providers. In order to rebuild the confidence of LGBTQ+ people in vaccines, governments, healthcare policymakers, and healthcare providers need to start by acknowledging, and then resolving, these disparities; building trust; dismantling systemic suppression and discrimination; and prioritizing the inclusion of LGBTQ+ people in research studies and public health policies.

China has initiated the COVID-19 vaccination for children aged 15–17 years since late July 2020. This study aimed to determine the association between adult vaccine hesitancy and parental acceptance of childhood COVID-19 vaccines in a multi-ethnicity area of northwestern China. A web-based investigation was performed with a convenience sampling strategy to recruit the parents aged 20–49 years. In a total of 13,451 valid respondents, 66.1% had received the COVID-19 vaccination, 26.6% were intent to receive, while 7.3% were not intent, with an increasing vaccine hesitancy (p < 0.001). Moreover, vaccination uptake of four common vaccines in their children remained low (29.0% for influenza vaccine, 17.9% for pneumonia vaccine, 10.9% for rotavirus vaccine, 8.0% for Enterovirus-71 vaccine), while overall parental acceptance of childhood COVID-19 vaccines was 50.0% (32.7% for those aged 0–5, 46.6% for 6–10, 73.3% for 11–18; p < 0.001). Vaccination uptake of these four vaccines and parental acceptance of childhood COVID-19 vaccine were negatively associated with adult vaccine hesitancy. In addition, respondents mostly preferred childhood COVID-19 vaccines with weak mild common adverse events (β = 1.993) and no severe adverse events (β = 1.731), demonstrating a positive association with adult vaccine hesitancy. Thus, it warrants specific countermeasures to reduce adult vaccine hesitancy and improve strategies for childhood vaccination.

Background: university students are believed to retain the highest levels of health literacy. They are perceived as the opinion leaders within their communities, therefore, their health-related beliefs and attitudes are deemed important for public health campaigns. This study aimed to investigate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy drivers among university students in the Czech Republic. Methods: a cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire was carried out in the weeks before the unrestricted vaccine deployment to Czech adults. The questionnaire had 21 multiple-choice items stratified in 4 categories, demographic characteristics, COVID-19-related anamnesis and influenza vaccine experience, attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, and the possible drivers of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy suggested by the WHO-SAGE. Results: out of the 1351 included students, 66.8% were females, 84.5% were Czech nationals, and 40.6% enrolled in healthcare programs. The overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance level was 73.3%, 19.3% of participants were vaccine-resistant, and only 7.4% were vaccine-hesitant. Trust in the pharmaceutical industry, trust in healthcare providers, and perceived knowledge sufficiency predicted higher odds of vaccine acceptance. In contrast, media and social media, personal beliefs, immunity misconception, previous COVID-19 infection, and suspicions about novel vaccines and the local availability predicted higher odds of vaccine hesitancy. Conclusions: The findings of this study predict a fair probability to achieve community immunity (herd immunity) among the target population group. The primary prevention strategies in the Czech Republic need to be culturally sensitive and inclusive for foreign nationals. As one-quarter of the participating students are dependent on vaccine safety data, this study findings support the call for independent studies evaluating the side effects of COVID-19 vaccines.

Vaccination rates in Italy fell until 2015 because of unfounded safety concerns. Public education and a 2017 law on mandatory vaccination have boosted rates since then. The aim of our study is to explore how trust in the scientific community and attitudes towards vaccines have changed in the period of 2017–2019 in Italy. Data were extracted from the Italian section of the 2017 and 2019 editions of the European Social Survey (ESS). We compared the two surveys highlighting changes in public opinion on vaccines. A descriptive analysis of the socio-cultural variables according to the answers provided to key questions on the harmfulness of vaccines was conducted. Differences between percentages were tested by using the χ2 test. The association between the opinion about the harmfulness of vaccines and trust in the scientific community was analyzed through a logistic regression model. Compared to ESS8, ESS9 showed an increase in the percentage of respondents disagreeing with the harmfulness of vaccines. Trust in the scientific community raised in the period from 2017 to 2019 (59% vs. 69.6%). Higher education was significantly associated with disagreement regarding the harmfulness of vaccines (odds ratio (OR) = 2.41, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 1.75–3.31), the strongest predictor was trust in the scientific community (OR = 10.47, 95% CI 7.55–14.52). In Italy, trust in the scientific community and in vaccinations has grown significantly in recent years, indicating a paradigm shift in public opinion compared to the past. Central actions and effective public communication strategies might reduce vaccine hesitancy and could be essential to garner public trust.

The COVID-19 pandemic may have reached a turning point as the World Health Organization and the global community of nations step up plans for mass vaccination campaigns. However, the COVID-19 vaccine-related conspiracy theories (e.g., falsehoods about birth control, women infertility, surveillance, and microchip humanity, etc.) have built new momentum for vaccine hesitancy. To this end, several nations worldwide, including Pakistan, are struggling to boost public trust and enthusiasm to get vaccinated, especially in an anxious and complicated atmosphere propelled by multiple, new and the deadliest variants of COVID-19. To address this critical research gap during these intensifying conditions of vaccine hesitancy, the present study makes the first attempt to explore the potential effects of various communication strategies, including public service message (safety benefits versus fear appraisals), media types (i.e., traditional versus digital), self-efficacy, perceived benefits and threats (susceptibility and severity), on the willingness to get vaccinated for COVID-19. Importantly, the underlying effects of public skepticism (in a moderating role) on these relationships were empirically examined. Using four fictitious COVID-19 immunization campaigns in a series of experiments with 2 (media type: traditional vs. digital) X 2 (service attribute: health and safety benefits vs. fear) message frames (represented as Group one to Group four), the findings identified fear appraisal as the most viable communication strategy in combating vaccine hesitancy. Moreover, public skepticism negatively moderated the effects of media types and public service message attributes on willingness to get vaccinated in relatively high (i.e., Group two), moderate (i.e., Group one and four), and low intensities (i.e., Group three). The pioneering findings of this research offer new strategic insights for the global health authorities and vaccine promoters to proactively address the downward spiral of people’s willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine.

There are scarce data regarding influenza vaccination among people with HIV infection (PWHIV). The goal of this explorative study is to assess hesitancy toward influenza vaccination in a group of PWHIV during the COVID-19 pandemic. A questionnaire was administered to 219 patients vaccinated at our clinic during the 2020-2021 campaign. It evaluated subjects' adherence to influenza vaccine over the last three seasonal vaccination campaigns, vaccine confidence, complacency and convenience, and the effect of the pandemic on the choice to become vaccinated. The population was divided into two groups: fully adherent to influenza vaccine (all three campaigns, 117 patients) and non-fully adherent (one or two campaigns, 102 patients). Adherence increased in the non-fully adherent group in 2020-2021, but the pandemic did not affect the choice. Misbeliefs emerged: the influenza vaccine was considered protective against SARS-CoV-2 (22.8% of the total population); almost half of all patients thought the influenza vaccine could improve their CD4 T cell level (57.3% in fully adherent, 40.2% in non-fully adherent, p .05). In 2020-2021 campaign, three quarters of the non-fully adherent group would not have been vaccinated in a location other than our clinic (75.5% vs. 88.9% in the fully adherent group, p .05). Conclusively, offering a secure and private space for vaccination against influenza seems to encourage vaccination; healthcare professionals should improve counseling to increase adherence and correct misbeliefs.

The purpose of our study was to determine the willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and factors associated with vaccine hesitancy among people with epilepsy (PWE). In December 2020, we performed an online cross-sectional survey of PWE and their caregivers in Lithuania before the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines to the public. The study sample consisted of 111 respondents (44 (39.6%) male, median age 25 years (range 1 to 70)). From 58 PWE who personally responded to the survey, 27 (46.6%) would be willing to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Among the 53 caregivers, 18 (34.0%) would accept the person they care for to be vaccinated. Willingness to be vaccinated was associated with receiving an influenza shot in 2020 (odds ratio (OR) = 9.17, 95% confidence interval (CI = 1.15–73.47), the beliefs that vaccines are generally safe (OR = 7.90, 95% CI = 2.43–25.74) and that they are the only convenient way to gain immunity (OR = 3.91, 95% CI = 1.02–15.05). Respondents were hesitant to accept the COVID-19 vaccine if they thought it could cause the infection (OR = 0.14, 95% CI = 0.04–0.49). COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is frequent among PWE and their caregivers. It is probably related to erroneous beliefs about their safety and mechanism of action.

Background: Vaccine hesitancy is related to a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination. Aim: to perform a systematic review of clinical trials on vaccine hesitancy (2015–2020). Methods: a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria (PRISMA). Five databases were screened—PubMed, Cochrane Library, DOAJ, SciELO and b-on—which comprise multiple resources. Keywords: “Vaccine hesitancy” and (“randomized controlled trial” or “clinical trial”). Inclusion criteria: trials about “vaccine hesitancy” enrolling patients and/or health professionals (2015–2020). Exclusion criteria: studies about other topics, repeated and qualitative studies, reviews and papers written in languages other than English, Portuguese, French or Spanish. Results: a total of 35 trials out of 90 were selected (19 PubMed, 14 Cochrane Library, 0 DOAJ, 0 SciELO and 2 b-on). Selected trials were classified into five topics: children/pediatric (n = 5); online or electronic information (n = 5); vaccination against a specific disease (n = 15) (e.g., influenza or COVID-2019); miscellaneous (n = 4); and educational strategies (n = 6). Conclusion: the provision of online or electronic information (e.g., through virtual reality, social websites of experts, or apps), communication-based interventions and training of health professionals, residents or subjects seemed to improve vaccine hesitancy.

Utility of vaccine campaigns to control coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) is not merely dependent on vaccine efficacy and safety. Vaccine acceptance among the general public and healthcare workers appears to have a decisive role in the successful control of the pandemic. The aim of this review was to provide an up-to-date assessment of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance rates worldwide. A systematic search of the peer-reviewed English survey literature indexed in PubMed was done on 25 December 2020. Results from 31 peer-reviewed published studies met the inclusion criteria and formed the basis for the final COVID-19 vaccine acceptance estimates. Survey studies on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rates were found from 33 different countries. Among adults representing the general public, the highest COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rates were found in Ecuador (97.0%), Malaysia (94.3%), Indonesia (93.3%) and China (91.3%). However, the lowest COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rates were found in Kuwait (23.6%), Jordan (28.4%), Italy (53.7), Russia (54.9%), Poland (56.3%), US (56.9%), and France (58.9%). Only eight surveys among healthcare workers (doctors and nurses) were found, with vaccine acceptance rates ranging from 27.7% in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to 78.1% in Israel. In the majority of survey studies among the general public stratified per country (29/47, 62%), the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination showed a level of ≥70%. Low rates of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance were reported in the Middle East, Russia, Africa and several European countries. This could represent a major problem in the global efforts to control the current COVID-19 pandemic. More studies are recommended to address the scope of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Such studies are particularly needed in the Middle East and North Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, Eastern Europe, Central Asia, Middle and South America. Addressing the scope of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in various countries is recommended as an initial step for building trust in COVID-19 vaccination efforts.

COVID-19 vaccines are crucial for achieving sufficient immunisation coverage to manage the pandemic, but vaccine hesitancy persists. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and determinants of vaccine hesitancy in adults and in parents for vaccinating their children using an integrated social cognition model. A community-based cohort in Singapore [N = 1623] completed a survey (wave 25) between June and July 2021 which measured their risk perceptions, distress, trust, vaccination beliefs, and vaccine intentions/behaviours. Results indicated low rates of hesitancy (9.9%) for own vaccination, with most concerns citing side effects, safety, and hasty development. Remaining respondents were vaccinated (69%) or intended to vaccinate (21%). The multivariable model (non-vaccinated respondents) indicated that, living with people in poor health, subjective norm, moral norm, benefits, and necessity of vaccination were associated with lower vaccine hesitancy (R2 Cox & Snell: 51.4%; p < 0.001). Hesitancy rates were higher for children's vaccination (15.9%), with male gender, lower perceived vaccine benefits, high COVID-19 risk perceptions, vaccination concerns, and necessity beliefs associated with higher odds of parental vaccine hesitancy (R2 Cox & Snell = 36.4%; p < 0.001). While levels of vaccine acceptance are high, more targeted messages are needed. For adults' vaccination, more emphasis should be on benefits and social gains, while for parental hesitancy, messages related to safety should be prioritised. Published version This research was funded by estate of the late Irene Tan Liang Kheng.

This study explored the effects of message framing on vaccine hesitancy for the antenatal whooping cough vaccine. The study also assessed whether the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) constructs had any explanatory utility for vaccine intentions and behaviours in pregnant women. A between-subjects, cross-sectional design was employed. Participants (n = 282) were women who were pregnant (mean = 28 weeks, SD = 7.0), living in England and between 18 and 44 years of age. A self-report web-based survey was used to collect data. Participants were randomly assigned to read either (i) disease risk, (ii) myth busting, or (iii) control information before answering questions based on the TPB. No significant effects of message framing were found. Attitudes (Beta = 0.699, p &lt, 0.001) and subjective norms (Beta = 0.262, p &lt, 0.001) significantly predicted intention to vaccinate but perceived behavioural control did not. The TPB constructs accounted for 86% and 36% of the variance in vaccine intention and vaccine history respectively. Disease risk information did not influence vaccine acceptability in this sample of English pregnant women. The study offered preliminary evidence that interventions targeting constructs from the TPB may promote vaccine acceptability among pregnant women.

Various control measures, including vaccination, have been taken to flatten the COVID-19 epidemic curve across the globe. However, in Bangladesh, many young adults, considered the asymptomatic transmitter of the disease, are waiting to get their first shot. Therefore, the potential predictors of the young adults’ vaccine uptake intention are significant to ensure their maximum vaccination when available to them. This study examined how vaccine hesitancy, eHealth literacy, and vaccine literacy are associated with young adults’ COVID-19 vaccine uptake intention in a lower-middle-income country. A total of 343 young adults participated in the study. Using ordinary least square and probit estimation, we examined the effect of the explanatory variables of interest on vaccine uptake intention. Vaccine hesitancy emerged as the strongest predictor of vaccine uptake intention. eHealth literacy shared a positive association with vaccine uptake intention, while vaccine literacy had no significant association. To make young adults feel more confident about the vaccine, transmitting the latest vaccine safety updates through authentic channels is essential. The government can aim to enhance the eHealth literacy of young adults as an increased level of eHealth literacy will enable young adults to extract reliable health-related information more efficiently than ever.

Achieving high levels of vaccination coverage against COVID-19 may be hindered by vaccine hesitancy. We quantified over time the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among university students, investigated its determinants, and analyzed student attitudes, risk perceptions and compliance with preventive measures. The survey was administered online from 1 March to 30 June 2021. A multivariable logistic regression model was built to identify predictors of hesitancy. Overall, we collected 5369 questionnaires that were grouped into three survey periods (March, April–May, and May–June). The response rate ranged from 81.2% to 76.4%, whereas vaccine hesitancy ranged from 22% to 29%. Multivariable analysis showed that April–May participants had higher odds of hesitancy than March respondents. Other positive predictors were being male, not being a healthcare student, having a lower academic level, and not disclosing a political position. Conversely, higher levels of perceived COVID-19 severity, concern for the emergency, confidence in vaccine safety and effectiveness, and self-reported adherence to mask wearing indoors and outdoors were negatively associated with hesitancy. We found that vaccine hesitancy changed over time and in relation to several factors. Strategies aimed at increasing the students’ awareness and engagement, restoring confidence in health authorities, and limiting disinformation around the vaccines should be devised.

In Australia, the National Immunisation Program and its Standard Vaccination Schedule are administered by the Australian Government Department of Health. While the public vaccination program’s safety and worth are generally agreed upon by doctors and public health professionals, some continue to see vaccinations as a source of danger and harm. The burden of vaccination in order to receive public services aligns government and medical interests, but a less-than-trusting public may see conspiracy in such requirements, resulting in vaccine hesitancy. The media’s attention to the topic, and a tendency toward misinformation on the part of anti-government opinion leaders, necessitate additional exploration of the administrative burden of vaccinations in an increasingly complex policy environment, where public health benefits are weighed against individual freedom and belief. This paper examines vaccinations as a burden, with costs in compliance, learning, and psychological terms, using posts from the social networking site Twitter as a corpus for exploratory content analysis in the specific case of Australia and its requirements. It is worth considering whether the positive aspects messaged by public health professionals are successfully entering into the discourse on vaccinations.

This study sought to identify individual-level determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy based on the Health Belief Model (HBM) and Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). An online population-based survey was distributed in English and Spanish. Data were derived from 1208 U.S. adults (52% female, 38.7% minorities), 43.5% of whom reported vaccine hesitancy. Multivariable analysis revealed that unemployed individuals were more likely (OR = 1.78, 95% CI: 1.16–2.73, p = 0.009) and married (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.39–0.81, p = 0.002) and higher income individuals (OR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.32–0.84, p = 0.008) were less likely to be hesitant. Individuals with greater perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 (OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.71–0.94, p = 0.006), who perceived vaccination as being convenient (OR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.74–1.00, p = 0.047), and who afforded greater importance to cues to action from government (OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.74–0.95, p = 0.005), public health (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.59–0.82, p &lt, 0.001), and healthcare experts (OR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.50–0.69, p &lt, 0.001) were also less likely to be hesitant. Findings suggest that HBM and TPB constructs may be useful in informing strategies to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Specifically, framing appeals based on perceptions of COVID-19 susceptibility, making vaccination convenient, and rebuilding trust through unified cues to action may help to overcome vaccine hesitancy.

In March 2021, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic still poses a threat to the global population, and is a public health challenge that needs to be overcome. Now more than ever, action is needed to tackle vaccine hesitancy, especially in light of the availability of effective and safe vaccines. A cross-sectional online survey was carried out on a representative random sample of 1011 citizens from the Emilia-Romagna region, in Italy, in January 2021. The questionnaire collected information on socio-demographics, comorbidities, past vaccination refusal, COVID-19-related experiences, risk perception of infection, and likelihood to accept COVID-19 vaccination. Multiple logistic regression analyses and classification tree analyses were performed to identify significant predictors of vaccine hesitancy and to distinguish groups with different levels of hesitancy. Overall, 31.1% of the sample reported hesitancy. Past vaccination refusal was the key discriminating variable followed by perceived risk of infection. Other significant predictors of hesitancy were: ages between 35 and 54 years, female gender, low educational level, low income, and absence of comorbidities. The most common concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine involved safety (54%) and efficacy (27%). Studying the main determinants of vaccine hesitancy can help with targeting vaccination strategies, in order to gain widespread acceptance—a key path to ensure a rapid way out of the current pandemic emergency.

There has been a continuous underrepresentation of minorities in healthcare research and vaccine trials, along with long-standing systemic racism and discrimination that have been fueling the distrust of the healthcare system among these communities for decades. The history and legacy of racial injustices and negative experiences within a culturally insensitive healthcare system have greatly contributed to vaccine hesitancy among ethnic minorities. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy will impact vaccine uptake in the US, subsequently hindering the establishment of herd immunity (75–85% of the population vaccinated) to mitigate SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission. Information targeting underserved racial/ethnic minorities in the US in a culturally competent manner has been lacking. This information is crucial for educating these communities about COVID-19 vaccines and their distribution as well as dispelling misinformation regarding vaccine trials, safety, and efficacy. This lack of education has greatly contributed to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and will increase disparities in vaccine uptake. Moreover, timely vaccinations are also essential to curtailing virus transmission and the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants that may evade the immune response produced by the three existing COVID-19 vaccines.

In 2019, vaccine hesitancy (VH), defined by the SAGE working group as “delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services” appeared on the WHO list of the top 10 public health threats requiring urgent attention, along with other global issues much more covered by media, such as Ebola virus infec- tion and climate change. This has led several countries worldwide to enact, strengthen or contemplate mandatory and/or recommended infant and childhood immunization to cover this gap.

Objectives: To investigate the differences in vaccine hesitancy and preference of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines between two countries, namely, China and the United States (U.S.). Method: A cross-national survey was conducted in both China and the United States, and discrete choice experiments, as well as Likert scales, were utilized to assess vaccine preference and the underlying factors contributing to vaccination acceptance. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to enable a direct comparison between the two countries. Results: A total of 9077 (5375 and 3702 from China and the United States, respectively) respondents completed the survey. After propensity score matching, over 82.0% of respondents from China positively accepted the COVID-19 vaccination, while 72.2% of respondents from the United States positively accepted it. Specifically, only 31.9% of Chinese respondents were recommended by a doctor to have COVID-19 vaccination, while more than half of the U.S. respondents were recommended by a doctor (50.2%), local health board (59.4%), or friends and families (64.8%). The discrete choice experiments revealed that respondents from the United States attached the greatest importance to the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines (44.41%), followed by the cost of vaccination (29.57%), whereas those from China held a different viewpoint, that the cost of vaccination covered the largest proportion in their trade-off (30.66%), and efficacy ranked as the second most important attribute (26.34%). Additionally, respondents from China tended to be much more concerned about the adverse effect of vaccination (19.68% vs. 6.12%) and have a lower perceived severity of being infected with COVID-19. Conclusion: Although the overall acceptance and hesitancy of COVID-19 vaccination in both countries are high, underpinned distinctions between these countries were observed. Owing to the differences in COVID-19 incidence rates, cultural backgrounds, and the availability of specific COVID-19 vaccines in the two countries, vaccine rollout strategies should be nation-dependent.

Vaccines are the optimal public health strategy to prevent disease, but the growing anti-vaccine movement has focused renewed attention on the need to persuade people to increase vaccine uptake. This commentary draws on social and behavioral science theory and proposes a vaccine uptake continuum comprised of five factors: (1) awareness of the health threat; (2) availability of the vaccine; (3) accessibility of the vaccine; (4) affordability of the vaccine; and (5) acceptability of the vaccine to effectively approach this rising challenge.

Background: Effective public health measures in tackling the global COVID-19 pandemic necessitate understanding risk of hesitance or resistance to vaccine uptake in different populations. The Middle East and North Africa currently lacks vital representative vaccine hesitancy data. Methods: We conducted the first representative national phone survey using probability sampling among the adult population of Qatar, between December 2020 and January 2021, to identify the prevalence and potential determinants of vaccine willingness. This was categorized into: vaccine acceptance (strongly agree), vaccine resistance (strongly disagree) and vaccine hesitance (somewhat agree, neutral, somewhat disagree). Bivariate and multinomial logistic regression models estimated associations between vaccine willingness and fifteen sociodemographic, work-, and health-related variables. Findings: In the total sample, 42.7% (95%CI: 39.5-46.1) were classified as accepting, 45.2% (95%CI: 41.9-48.4) hesitant, and 12.1% (95%CI: 10.1-14.4) resistant. Those in the vaccine resistance group reported no source of endorsement will increase their confidence in accepting the vaccine (58.9% vs. 5.6% vs. 0.2%, respectively). Hesitancy and resistance were explained by female gender, Arab ethnicity, migrant status/type, and concerns about vaccine side-effects. COVID-19 related bereavement, personal infection, and quarantine status were not significantly associated with any group. Absence of or lack of concern about contracting the virus was solely associated with resistance. Interpretation: COVID-19 vaccine resistance, hesitance, and concern about side-effects is high in Qatar’s population compared with those globally. Urgent public health engagement should focus on women, Qataris (non-migrants) and those of Arab ethnicity. Funding: This study was funded by the Emergency Response Grant at Qatar University (QUERG-CAS-2020-1). Declaration of Interests: P.M.H. reports personal fees from Janssen, Lundbeck, Otsuka, New Bridge Pharmaceuticals and Sunovion, outside the submitted work. All other authors report no conflicts of interest. Ethics Approval Statement: The study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Boards at Qatar University (QU-IRB 1338-EA/20) and Hamad Medical Corporation (MRC-05-089).

The impact of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among family and friends on vaccination preferences is not well explored. A valid and reliable questionnaire was deployed online via mTurk to recruit a national random sample of adult Americans to understand COVID-19 vaccination preferences and its relationship with COVID-19 infection in social networks. A total of 1602 individuals participated in the study where the majority had taken at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (79%) and almost a tenth were planning to do so (10%) or did not want to take the vaccine (11%). Compared to those who knew family members or friends affected by COVID-19, those who did not know anyone infected with (AOR = 3.20), hospitalized for (AOR = 3.60), or died of COVID-19 (AOR = 2.97) had statistically significantly higher odds of refusing the vaccines. Most strategies for reducing COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy focus on highlighting the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines. We suggest that the dangers of not getting the vaccine should also be emphasized as many people who do not know someone who was affected with COVID-19 are also hesitant towards vaccination. These individuals may not fully appreciate the morbidity and mortality impact of COVID-19 infections and the messaging can be tailored to highlight the risk of not having vaccines.

Vaccines represent fundamental public health interventions aimed to counteract or, at least, partially mitigate the severe epidemiological and economic burden generated by communicable disorders, in terms of (i) outcome-related, (ii) behavior-related productivity gains, and (iii) community externalities in developed settings as well as in developing countries. Despite their importance, several parents choose not to immunize their children due to the rising phenomenon of anti-vaccination movements that divulge vaccine-related “fake news” and “post-modern, post-factual truths”. Vaccine hesitancy represents a threat that can seriously jeopardize the implementation and success of vaccination campaigns. Within this framework, from a public health perspective, community pharmacies can play a vital role in that pharmacists can: (i) act as immunizers (vaccine distributors, educators, facilitators and administrators), (ii) improve vaccine-related health literacy and vaccination coverage rates as well as (iii) remove barriers and obstacles to the access to healthcare settings offering immunization services and (iv) counteract vaccine hesitancy.

IntroductionUtility of vaccine campaigns to control coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is not merely dependent on vaccine efficacy and safety. Vaccine acceptance among the general public and the healthcare workers, appears to have a decisive role for successful control of the pandemic.AimTo provide an up-to-date assessment of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance rates worldwide.MethodsA systematic search of the peer-reviewed English survey literature indexed in PubMed was done on December 25, 2020. Results from 30 studies, met the inclusion criteria and formed the basis for final COVID-19 vaccine acceptance estimates. Results of an additional recent survey from Jordan and Kuwait was considered in this review as well.ResultsSurvey studies on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rates were found from 33 different countries. Among adults representing the general public, the highest COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rates were found in Ecuador (97.0%), Malaysia (94.3%), Indonesia (93.3%) and China (91.3%). On the other hand, the lowest COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rates were found in Kuwait (23.6%), Jordan (28.4%), Italy (53.7), Russia (54.9%), Poland (56.3%), US (56.9%), and France (58.9%). Only eight surveys among healthcare workers (doctors, nurses) were found, with vaccine acceptance rates ranging from 27.7% in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to 78.1% in Israel. In a majority of survey studies among the general public (62%), the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination showed a level of ≥ 70%.ConclusionsLow rates of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance were reported in the Middle East, Russia, Africa and several European countries. This could represent a major problem in the global efforts that aim to control the current COVID-19 pandemic. More studies are recommended to address the scope of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Such studies are particularly needed in the Middle East Africa, Eastern Europe, Central Asia, Middle and Latin America.Graphical AbstractCOVID-19 vaccine acceptance rates worldwideFor countries with more than one survey study, the vaccine acceptance rate of the latest survey was used in this graph. The estimates were also based on studies from the general population, except in the following cases were no studies from the general public were found (Australia: parents/guardians; DRC: healthcare workers; Hong Kong: healthcare workers; Malta: healthcare workers).

The study of the quality press and the use of sources is relevant to understand the role of journalists in scientific controversies. The objective was to examine media sourcing patterns, using the case of vaccines as a backdrop. Articles were retrieved from the national quality press in Spain. Content analysis was undertaken on the sources and on other variables such as tone, frames and journalistic genre. The software myNews and NVivo were used for data collection and coding, while SPSS and Excel were used for statistical analysis. Findings indicate that sources related to the government, professional associations and scientific companies are the most frequently used, confirming the central role of government institutions as journalistic sources. These were followed by university scientists, scientific journals and clinicians. On the other hand, NGOs and patients groups were included in fewer than 5% of the articles. More than 30% included none or just one source expressing unbalanced perspectives. Frequent use of certain source types, particularly governmental, may indicate state structures of power. The study provides a better understanding of journalistic routines in the coverage of vaccines, including fresh perspectives in the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The World Health Organization has recommended that individual governments identify vaccine hesitancy areas. It is proposed that the governments, with the aid of local organizations, educate and implement social insights on the vaccination so that high population levels are covered with this safe immune program. Methods: A longitudinal online survey covered 3000 adults from India. We examined the demography, behavioral (socio-economic) attitude, vaccine hesitancy, vaccine resistance for the COVID-19 vaccine. The specific reasons for the COVID-19 vaccine decline were also evaluated. Results: Our survey revealed 59% definite response, 29% low-level response, and 7% high-level response for vaccine hesitancy, while 6% had resistant views on the COVID-19 vaccine. Individuals who had higher income levels, lived in a society, maintained social distancing, had downloaded the COVID-19 update app, showed a positive attitude towards their government, and more confidence in their healthcare system were more inclined towards the vaccination. On the contrary, individuals who had overstated the risks of COVID-19 and had a religious and populistic attitude towards vaccination were more hesitant/resistant to vaccination. The respondents who declined vaccine administration were further evaluated for their specific reason for their response. The most common reasons for declining the COVID-19 vaccine were post-vaccine scare of adverse health effects and accepting the information spread by social media. Conclusions: The results in our study show that by identifying population “hot spots” that have negative or unclear information on the COVID-19 vaccination, these “hot spots” can be addressed by involving friendly organizations that can clear their strong disbeliefs and increase the percentage of vaccine-definite people within the population. The role of government-induced COVID-19 vaccine policy measures can always be beneficial to cause this shift from disbelief to confidence within the population.

Even with the availability of COVID-19 vaccines, factors associated with vaccine hesitancy and uptake among nurses are unknown. This study evaluated COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake of nursing staff during one of the first COVID-19 vaccine rollouts in the United States. A cross-sectional survey was conducted during February 2021 among nursing staff working in a large medical center in central United States. There were 276 respondents, 81.9% of participants were willing to receive the vaccine during the initial rollout, 11.2% were hesitant, and only 5.1% were unwilling. The hesitant group was likely to report having inadequate information to make an informed decision about whether to receive the vaccine (45.2%) and about vaccine expectations (32.3%). The majority (83.3%) received at least one dose of the vaccine. Having greater than 10 years’ work experience (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.16–7.9) and confidence in vaccine safety (OR 7.78, 95% CI 4.49–13.5) were significantly associated with vaccine uptake. While our study indicates higher vaccine uptake among nursing staff during an active vaccine rollout, there remains sustained hesitancy and unwillingness to uptake. For those hesitant to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, public health efforts to provide more data on side effects and efficacy may help increase vaccine uptake.

Background: Acceleration of mass vaccination strategies is the only pathway to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare professionals and students have a key role in shaping public opinion about vaccines. This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of dental students globally towards COVID-19 vaccines and explore the potential drivers for students’ acceptance levels. Methods: A global cross-sectional study was carried out in February 2021 using an online questionnaire. The study was liaised by the scientific committee of the International Association of Dental Students (IADS), and data were collected through the national and local coordinators of IADS member organizations. The dependent variable was the willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine, and the independent variables included demographic characteristics, COVID-19-related experience, and the drivers of COVID-19 vaccine-related attitude suggested by the WHO SAGE. Results: A total of 6639 students from 22 countries, representing all world regions, responded to the questionnaire properly. Their mean age was 22.1 ± 2.8 (17–40) years, and the majority were females (70.5%), in clinical years (66.8%), and from upper-middle-income economies (45.7%). In general, 22.5% of dental students worldwide were hesitant, and 13.9% rejected COVID-19 vaccines. The students in low- and lower-middle-income (LLMI) economies had significantly higher levels of vaccine hesitancy compared to their peers in upper-middle- and high-income (UMHI) economies (30.4% vs. 19.8%, p &lt, 0.01). Conclusions: The global acceptance level of dental students for COVID-19 vaccines was suboptimal, and their worrisome level of vaccine hesitancy was influenced by the socioeconomic context where the dental students live and study. The media and social media, public figures, insufficient knowledge about vaccines, and mistrust of governments and the pharmaceutical industry were barriers to vaccination. The findings of this study call for further implementation of epidemiology (infectious diseases) education within undergraduate dental curricula.

Ending the COVID-19 pandemic requires achieving herd immunity, either by previous infection or by vaccination. However, concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine are growing around the globe. The current study was conducted to investigate young the adult population’s hesitancy towards the vaccine. The study used a prospective cross-sectional design. Data was collected using an online self-administered questionnaire. A total of 862 Saudi adults participated. Information was gathered on the participants’ perspectives towards the severity and susceptibility of the COVID-19 infection, reasons for their hesitancy to receive the vaccine, perceived benefits, and reasons for action. Just under a quarter (19.6%) of respondents had previously tested positive for COVID-19. A small minority of the participants had already received the vaccine (2.1%), while 20.3% had registered in the Sehaty app (application) to receive the vaccine. Just under half of them (48%) will take the vaccine when mass vaccination is achieved and approximately the same number (46.7%) will only take it if it is made mandatory. Vaccine reluctance is highly prevalent among the general public in Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 pandemic. While many are aware of a high likelihood of getting the infection, the efficacy and safety of the COVID-19 vaccine were reported as barriers to vaccination.

Despite the well-developed Chinese National Immunization Program, vaccine hesitancy in China is rising. As part of the response, Chinese scholars have studied determinants and proposed solutions to vaccination hesitancy. We performed a scoping review of Chinese literature (2007–2019), drawn from four Chinese databases. We mapped relevant information and presented a systemic account of the proposed determinants and responses to vaccine hesitancy in China. We identified 77 relevant studies that reveal four approaches to vaccine hesitancy. Most Chinese studies define vaccine hesitancy as a problem of vaccine safety and vaccine incident response and place accountability on the level of governance, such as regulation deficits and inappropriate crisis management. A first minority of studies tied vaccination hesitancy to unprofessional medical conduct and called for additional resources and enhanced physician qualifications. A second minority of studies positioned vaccination hesitancy as a problem of parental belief and pointed to the role of media, proposing enhanced communication and education. Chinese literature ties vaccine hesitancy primarily to vaccine safety and medical conduct. Compared to international research, parental concerns are underrepresented. The Chinese context of vaccination scandals notably frames the discussion of vaccination hesitancy and potential solutions, which stresses the importance of considering vaccination hesitancy in specific social and political contexts.

In this study, we evaluated the status of and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination of healthcare workers in two major hospital systems (academic and private) in Southern California. Responses were collected via an anonymous and voluntary survey from a total of 2491 participants, including nurses, physicians, other allied health professionals, and administrators. Among the 2491 participants that had been offered the vaccine at the time of the study, 2103 (84%) were vaccinated. The bulk of the participants were middle-aged college-educated White (73%), non-Hispanic women (77%), and nursing was the most represented medical occupation (35%). Political affiliation, education level, and income were shown to be significant factors associated with vaccination status. Our data suggest that the current allocation of healthcare workers into dichotomous groups such as “anti-vaccine vs. pro-vaccine” may be inadequate in accurately tailoring vaccine uptake interventions. We found that healthcare workers that have yet to receive the COVID-19 vaccine likely belong to one of four categories: the misinformed, the undecided, the uninformed, or the unconcerned. This diversity in vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers highlights the importance of targeted intervention to increase vaccine confidence. Regardless of governmental vaccine mandates, addressing the root causes contributing to vaccine hesitancy continues to be of utmost importance.

Vaccine hesitancy has been considered one of the most severe threats to global health, as it represents an obstacle to achieving adequate vaccination coverage. Recent research studies aimed at investigating the propensity for anti-COVID vaccination among adults have found a high prevalence of vaccine hesitancy, but few data are available on parental vaccine hesitancy. We therefore built an anonymous online survey to investigate the factors related to the vaccine hesitancy of parents of adolescents between 12 and 17 years of age, with a special focus on demographic factors and the domains of confidence and complacency. The online survey was conducted by using the Crowd Signal platform from 15 July to 16 August 2021, in Italy. A total of 1799 analyzable questionnaires were analyzed. Overall, Favorable and Doubtful parents declared a higher level of confidence on safety and efficacy of pediatric vaccines and on confidence in health institutions than Hesitant/Reluctant ones (p-values &lt, 0.001). The univariate multinomial logistic regression analysis and the multivariate multinomial logistic regression analysis showed that the Hesitant/Reluctant parents were younger than 40 years of age, with a secondary-school or three-year degree, free-lance, with a family income below € 28,000, with an erroneous perception of the risk of COVID-19 as disease and with fear of anti-COVID vaccination. These results, which should be confirmed in a larger population and in different geographical areas, should lead Institutions and stakeholders to identify targeted communication tools to improve trust in health institutions, especially by younger parents.

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is known to play a relevant role in thwarting the efforts toward reaching satisfactory influenza vaccination coverage, and has caused similar difficulties during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to describe the phenomenon and produce insights on the reasons behind VH. A survey was administered between December 2020 and February 2021 to adults living in the cities of Bologna and Palermo. Of the 443 subjects enrolled, 47.3% were likely to get the influenza vaccination, while 75.6% were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccination. The most frequent determinants that motivated the willingness to get the COVID-19 vaccine were trust in the safety of vaccines and belief that the vaccine is an effective tool. As for people’s unwillingness to be vaccinated, being exposed to information that produced doubts about the vaccine and lack of trust in a newly developed vaccine were the most frequently involved determinants. Statistically significant positive associations were found between the willingness to be vaccinated and postgraduate education and the propensity towards influenza vaccination. A negative association with being over 40 years old and of female gender was also found. These results might have an impact in better understanding individual reasons behind VH, identifying which categories are more exposed to it and which strategies should be implemented.

As the COVID-19 pandemic rages unabated, and with more infectious variants, vaccination may offer a way to transit out of strict restrictions on physical human interactions to curb the virus spread and prevent overwhelming the healthcare system. However, vaccine hesitancy threatens to significantly impact our progress towards achieving this. It is thus important to understand the sentiments regarding vaccination for different segments of the population to facilitate the development of effective strategies to persuade these groups. Here, we surveyed the COVID-19 vaccination sentiments among a highly educated group of graduate students from the National University of Singapore (NUS). Graduate students who are citizens of 54 different countries, mainly from Asia, pursue studies in diverse fields, with 32% expressing vaccine hesitancy. Citizenship, religion, country of undergraduate/postgraduate studies, exposure risk and field of study are significantly associated with vaccine sentiments. Students who are Chinese citizens or studied in Chinese Universities prior to joining NUS are more hesitant, while students of Indian descent or studied in India are less hesitant about vaccination. Side effects, safety issues and vaccine choice are the major concerns of the hesitant group. Hence, this study would facilitate the development of strategies that focus on these determinants to enhance vaccine acceptance.

The present study assessed the willingness of the general population to receive COVID-19 vaccines and identified factors that influence vaccine hesitancy and resistance. A national online survey was conducted from 29 January 2021 to 26 April 2021 in China. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors that influence vaccine hesitancy and resistance. Of the 34,041 participants surveyed, 18,810 (55.3%) were willing to get vaccinated, 13,736 (40.3%) were hesitant, and 1495 (4.4%) were resistant. Rates of vaccine acceptance increased over time, with geographical discrepancies in vaccine hesitancy and resistance between provinces in China. Vaccine safety was the greatest concern expressed by most participants (24,461 [71.9%]), and the major reason for participants’ refusing vaccination (974 [65.2%]). Government agencies (23,131 [68.0%]) and social media (20,967 [61.6%]) were the main sources of COVID-19 vaccine information. Compared with vaccination acceptance, female, young and middle-aged, high income, and perceived low-risk of infection were associated with vaccine hesitancy. Histories of allergic reactions to other vaccines and depression symptoms were related to vaccine resistance. Common factors that influenced vaccine hesitancy and resistance were residing in cities and perceiving less protection with vaccines than with other protective measures. The results indicate that the rate of vaccine resistance is relatively low, but vaccine hesitancy is common. Individuals who are female, young and middle-aged, with a high income, and residing in cities are more likely to be hesitant for vaccination and should be the target populations for vaccination campaigns. Specific vaccine messaging from the government and social media could alleviate public concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy.

Since health professionals provide frontline care to COVID-19 patients, information on vaccine acceptance among healthcare workers is needed. We developed and implemented an anonymous internet-based cross-sectional survey with direct solicitation among employees of a safety net health system. Items queried demographic and health-related characteristics, experience with and knowledge of COVID-19, and determinants of decisions to vaccinate. COVID-19 vaccine acceptance groups (acceptors, hesitant, refusers) were defined, an adapted version of the WHO vaccine hesitancy scale was included. The survey demonstrated good reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92 for vaccine hesitancy scale, 0.93 for determinants). General linear and logistic regression methods examined factors which were univariately associated with vaccine hesitancy and vaccine acceptance, respectively. Multivariable models were constructed with stepwise model-building procedures. Race/ethnicity, marital status, job classification, immunocompromised status, flu vaccination and childhood vaccination opinions independently predicted hesitancy scale scores. Gender, education, job classification and BMI independently predicted acceptance, hesitancy, and refusal groups. Among hesitant employees, uncertainty was reflected in reports of motivating factors influencing their indecision. Despite a strong employee-support environment and job protection, respondents reported physical and mental health effects. The appreciation of varied reasons for refusing vaccination should lead to culturally sensitive interventions to increase vaccination rates amongst healthcare workers.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been a growing concern. The pandemic has proved to be very complicated with the mutated virus. The Delta variant is contributing to a surge of cases across the globe. Vaccine hesitancy can be socially contagious, requiring more stringent efforts from policy makers and health professionals in promoting vaccine uptake. Some evidence shows that vaccine acceptance appears to have played an integral role in successfully controlling the pandemic. Vaccination acceptance, however, demands that the public has a good understanding of the vaccine’s benefits in promoting healthier societies and people’s quality of life. Unclear COVID-19 vaccine information can lead to distrust in vaccines and vaccine hesitancy. It is of paramount importance to communicate clear and unbiased vaccine information to the public to encourage vaccine uptake. Word of mouth communication remains important to further promote COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the community. This short paper discusses the role of social bonds and public trust/distrust and word of mouth communication in vaccine decision making. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) may be significant in jeopardizing efforts to mass containment of COVID-19. A cross-sectional survey was carried out on a sample of 2667 Italian college students, before the COVID-19 vaccines became available for this age group (from 7 May to 31 May 2021). An online survey was created to obtain information about socio-demographic, health-related, and psychological factors linked to mRNA and viral vector COVID-19 vaccines. Statistically significant higher VH (30.4%) and vaccine resistance (12.2%) rates were found for viral vector than mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (7.2% and 1.0%, respectively; p < 0.001). Factors related to viral vector VH were partially different from those related to mRNA VH. Students with greater endorsement on conspiracy statements and negative attitudes toward the vaccine had higher odds of being vaccine-hesitant or -resistant. Students who had received a previous COVID-19 test and who scored higher on the agreeableness personality dimension had lower odds to be vaccine-hesitant or -resistant. The willingness to choose the vaccine was related to the viral vector but not to the mRNA VH. Taking into consideration the factors involved in vaccine hesitancy/resistance in college students could represent a key public health strategy to increase vaccine coverage and reduce viral spreading.

Background: Vaccine hesitancy is the next great barrier for public health. Arab Americans are a rapidly growing demographic in the United States with limited information on the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy. We therefore sought to study the attitudes towards the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine amongst Arab American health professionals living in the United States. Methods: This was a cross sectional study utilizing an anonymous online survey. The survey was distributed via e-mail to National Arab American Medical Association members and Arab-American Center for Economic and Social Services healthcare employees. Respondents were considered vaccine hesitant if they selected responses other than a willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Results: A total of 4000 surveys were sent via e-mail from 28 December 2020 to 31 January 2021, and 513 responses were received. The highest group of respondents were between the ages of 18–29 years and physicians constituted 48% of the respondents. On multivariable analysis, we found that respondents who had declined an influenza vaccine in the preceding 5 years (p &lt, 0.001) and allied health professionals (medical assistants, hospital administrators, case managers, researchers, scribes, pharmacists, dieticians and social workers) were more likely to be vaccine hesitant (p = 0.025). In addition, respondents earning over $150,000 US dollars annually were less likely to be vaccine hesitant and this finding was significant on multivariable analysis (p = 0.011). Conclusions: Vaccine hesitancy among health care providers could have substantial impact on vaccine attitudes of the general population, and such data may help inform vaccine advocacy efforts.

This retrospective cohort study compared the rates of virologically-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, symptomatic or lethal COVID-19 among the residents of the Italian province of Pescara who received one or two doses of COVID-19 vaccines, versus the unvaccinated. The official data of the National Health System were used, and a total of 69,539 vaccinated adults were compared with 175,687 unvaccinated. Among the subjects who received at least one vaccine dose, 85 infections (0.12%), 18 severe and 3 lethal COVID-19 cases were recorded after an average follow-up of 38 days. Among the unvaccinated, the numbers were 6948 (4.00%), 933 (0.53%) and 241 (0.14%), respectively. The serious adverse event reports—yet unconfirmed—were 24 out of 102,394 administered doses. In a Cox model, adjusting for age, gender, and selected comorbidities, the effectiveness of either BNT162b2, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or mRNA-1273 vaccines was higher than 95% in preventing infections (mostly due to B.1.1.7 variant), symptomatic or lethal COVID-19. No differences were observed across genders, and among the 691 subjects who received the second dose of vaccine later than the recommended date. Although preliminary, these findings support current immunization policies and may help reducing vaccine hesitancy.

In January 2021, Israel started vaccinating healthcare workers (HCWs) and individuals older than 65 years with COVID-19 vaccines. Scientific literature points to vaccine hesitancy as being a major health concern. During time of pandemics, increased consciousness of health behaviors may be encountered. The current study aimed to assess attitudes to general vaccines and to COVID-19 vaccines in particular among adult (&gt, 18) Israeli general public, and among Israeli dentists and dental hygienists. Cross-sectional surveys were filled out by a total of 501 participants (361 Israeli adults &gt, 18 years, 73 dental hygienists, and 67 dentists). Along with basic demographics, participants responded to the Hebrew VAX, COVID-VAX and HCS scales. Group comparisons were analyzed using t tests and ANOVAs with Scheffe’s test used for post hoc comparisons. Dental hygienists demonstrated significantly higher anti-vaccinations approaches than both dentists (p &lt, 0.01) and the general public (p &lt, 0.05). In all groups, attitudes towards the COVID-19 vaccines were more negative compared to attitudes towards general vaccines, with hygienists demonstrating significant negative attitudes compared to dentists (p &lt, 0.05). The general public (p = 0.56) and hygienists demonstrated increased health awareness compared to dentists (p &lt, 0.05). As health awareness has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic primary strategies to combat vaccine hesitancy should be implemented in the general public, and in particular, an dental teams.

Purpose: This study analyzed the insights and sentiments of COVID-19 anti-vaccine comments from Instagram feeds and Facebook postings. The sentiments related to the acceptance and effectiveness of the vaccines that were on the verge of being made available to the public. Patients and methods: The qualitative software QSR-NVivo 10 was used to manage, code, and analyse the data. Results: The analyses uncovered several major issues concerning COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The production of the COVID-19 vaccine at an unprecedented speed evoked the fear of skipping steps that would compromise vaccine safety. The unknown long-term effects and duration of protection erode confidence in taking the vaccines. There were also persistent concerns with regard to vaccine compositions that could be harmful or contain aborted foetal cells. The rate of COVID-19 death was viewed as low. Many interpreted the 95% effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine as insufficient. Preference for immunity gains from having an infection was viewed as more effective. Peer-reviewed publication-based data were favoured as a source of trust in vaccination decision-making. Conclusions: The anti-COVID-19 vaccine sentiments found in this study provide important insights for the formulation of public health messages to instill confidence in the vaccines.

It is unclear whether information given about the benefits and risks of routine childhood vaccination during consent may cue parental vaccine hesitancy. Parents were surveyed before and after reading vaccine consent information at a public expo event in Sydney, Australia. We measured vaccine hesitancy with Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccine Short Scale (PACV-SS), informed decision-making with Informed Subscale of the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS-IS), items from Stage of Decision Making, Positive Attitude Assessment, Vaccine Safety and Side Effect Concern, and Vaccine Communication Framework (VCF) tools. Overall, 416 parents showed no change in vaccine hesitancy (mean PACV-SS score pre = 1.97, post = 1.94, diff = −0.02 95% CI −0.10 to 0.15) but were more informed (mean DCS-IS score pre = 29.05, post = 7.41, diff = −21.63 95% CI −24.17 to −18.56), were more positive towards vaccination (pre = 43.8% post = 50.4%, diff = 6.5% 95% CI 3.0% to 10.0%), less concerned about vaccine safety (pre = 28.5%, post = 23.0%, diff = −5.6% 95% CI −2.3% to −8.8%) and side effects (pre = 37.0%, post = 29.0%, diff = −8.0% 95% CI −4.0% to −12.0%) with no change in stage of decision-making or intention to vaccinate. Providing information about the benefits and risks of routine childhood vaccination increases parents’ informed decision-making without increasing vaccine hesitancy.

This paper highlights the low levels of vaccine coverage and high levels of reported vaccination hesitancy in Yerevan, Armenia, that present profound challenges to the control of disease through routine vaccination programmes. We draw on investigations of hesitancy towards the introduction of new vaccines, using the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine Gardasil as a case study, to interrogate underlying challenges to vaccine acceptance. We analyse primary data from the introduction of Gardasil, first used in Armenia in 2017, to investigate how levels of medical knowledge amongst physicians in 20 health facilities in Yerevan, Armenia, regarding vaccine science influence attitudes towards the introduction of a newly developed vaccine. A questionnaire-based cross-sectional study was completed by 348 physicians between December 2017 and September 2018. The responding physicians displayed a respectable level of knowledge and awareness regarding vaccination with respect to some characteristics (e.g., more than 81% knew that HPV infection was commonly asymptomatic, 73% knew that HPV infection was implicated in most cervical cancers, and 87% knew that cervical cancer is the most prevalent cancer amongst women) but low knowledge and poor understanding of other key issues such as the age at which women were most likely to develop cervical cancer (only 15% answered correctly), whether or not the vaccine should be administered to people who had already been infected (27% answered correctly) and whether sexually active young people should be treated for infection before vaccination (26% answered correctly). The study suggests that the drivers of vaccine hesitancy are complex and may not be consistent from vaccine to vaccine. The Armenian healthcare sector may need to provide additional training, awareness-raising and educational activities alongside the introduction of new vaccines to improve understanding of and trust in vaccination programmes.

In 2013, in a bid to combat Vaccine Hesitancy (VH) and provide information on vaccines by communicating with the general public and the health community (e.g., healthcare workers and public health operators), the Italian Society of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine (S.It.I.) published the national website “VaccinarSì”. The project was subsequently extended to ten Italian Regions. This led to the creation of the VaccinarSì Network, whose websites are publicly owned. The aim of this work was to present the framework of the websites of the VaccinarSì Network and to analyse user behaviour in the pre-COVID-19-era (dating from each website’s publication until 31 January 2020) and in the COVID-19-era (from 1 February 2020 to 31 January 2021). Some metrics such as the number of visits to the site (sessions, number of users and average session duration), user behaviour (pages viewed, bounce rate and organic search) and the session acquisition path (direct traffic, referrals and social traffic) were searched, extrapolated and processed with Google Analytics. Qualitative and normally distributed quantitative variables were summarised with their absolute (relative) frequencies and means. Statistical differences between the means of the two periods were evaluated through paired t-test. A two-tailed p-value less than 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. When the total values recorded over the period were compared, an overall increase in metrics was observed—the number of individual users, visits and individual pageviews rose in a statistically significant way. Our study aimed to highlight how combining disciplines such as health education and digital communication via Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) represents the best strategy to support citizens. This approach gives them the tools to become independent and responsible players that are capable of voluntarily and consciously choosing to adhere to vaccination programs. The VaccinarSì Network’s goal for the future is to reach an even wider audience. By building each user’s critical knowledge, this network enables users to be active components of a wider, more empowered community.

Background: Since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic, there was no doubt that vaccination is the ideal protocol to tackle it. Within a year, a few COVID-19 vaccines have been developed and authorized. This unparalleled initiative in developing vaccines created many uncertainties looming around the efficacy and safety of these vaccines. This study aimed to assess the side effects and perceptions following COVID-19 vaccination in Jordan. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted by distributing an online survey targeted toward Jordan inhabitants who received any COVID-19 vaccines. Data were statistically analyzed and certain machine learning (ML) tools, including multilayer perceptron (MLP), eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), random forest (RF), and K-star were used to predict the severity of side effects. Results: A total of 2213 participants were involved in the study after receiving Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, Pfizer-BioNTech, and other vaccines (38.2%, 31%, 27.3%, and 3.5%, respectively). Generally, most of the post-vaccination side effects were common and non-life-threatening (e.g., fatigue, chills, dizziness, fever, headache, joint pain, and myalgia). Only 10% of participants suffered from severe side effects; while 39% and 21% of participants had moderate and mild side effects, respectively. Despite the substantial variations between these vaccines in the presence and severity of side effects, the statistical analysis indicated that these vaccines might provide the same protection against COVID-19 infection. Finally, around 52.9% of participants suffered before vaccination from vaccine hesitancy and anxiety; while after vaccination, 95.5% of participants have advised others to get vaccinated, 80% felt more reassured, and 67% believed that COVID-19 vaccines are safe in the long term. Furthermore, based on the type of vaccine, demographic data, and side effects, the RF, XGBoost, and MLP gave both high accuracies (0.80, 0.79, and 0.70, respectively) and Cohen’s kappa values (0.71, 0.70, and 0.56, respectively). Conclusions: The present study confirmed that the authorized COVID-19 vaccines are safe and getting vaccinated makes people more reassured. Most of the post-vaccination side effects are mild to moderate, which are signs that body’s immune system is building protection. ML can also be used to predict the severity of side effects based on the input data; predicted severe cases may require more medical attention or even hospitalization.

Introduction: New York City is one of the areas most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Healthcare workers are among those at high risk of contracting the virus, and a vital source of information and trust in vaccines to the community. Methods: This study was conducted about attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers at a public hospital in New York City during the beginning of COVID-19 vaccination. 428 hospital employees responded. Results: Several factors were significantly associated with vaccine attitudes, including demographics such as gender (p = 0.002), age (p = 0.005), race (p &lt, 0.001) and home location (p &lt, 0.001), role within the hospital (p &lt, 0.001), knowledge about the virus (p &lt, 0.001) and confidence in and expectations about personal protective equipment and behaviors (p &lt, 0.001). Structural equation modeling revealed that the most predictive factors were prior vaccine attitudes and concern with the speed of testing and approval of the vaccines (p &lt, 0.001). Multivariate analysis reinforced these, while also identifying perceived personal risk as significant (p = 0.033). Conclusions: Several modifiable factors that reflect confidence in science, scientific knowledge, personal risk perception, experience and medical authority are correlated with vaccine attitudes, indicating that a holistic educational approach to improve trust in science is likely to be effective in long-term reduction in vaccine hesitancy.

Several COVID-19 vaccines have been on the market since early 2021 and may vary in their effectiveness and safety. This study characterizes hesitancy about accepting COVID-19 vaccines among parents in Shanghai, China, and identifies how sensitive they are to changes in vaccine safety and effectiveness profiles. Schools in each township of Minhang District, Shanghai, were sampled, and parents in the WeChat group of each school were asked to participate in this cross-sectional Internet-based survey. Parents responded to questions about hesitancy and were given information about five different COVID-19 vaccine candidates, the effectiveness of which varied between 50 and 95% and which had a risk of fever as a side effect between 5 and 20%. Overall, 3673 parents responded to the survey. Almost 90% would accept a vaccine for themselves (89.7%), for their child (87.5%) or for an elderly parent (88.5%) with the most ideal attributes (95% effectiveness with 5% risk of fever). But with the least ideal attributes (50% effectiveness and a 20% risk of fever) these numbers dropped to 33.5%, 31.3%, and 31.8%, respectively. Vaccine hesitancy, age at first child’s birth, and relative income were all significantly related to sensitivity to vaccine safety and effectiveness. Parents showed a substantial shift in attitudes towards a vaccine based on its safety and effectiveness profile. These findings indicate that COVID-19 vaccine acceptance may be heavily influenced by how effective the vaccine actually is and could be impeded or enhanced based on vaccines already on the market.

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) has been identified as one of the major health concerns of our time by the World Health Organization. It may prove especially detrimental in the light of the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, as vaccination campaigns still represent the primary strategy against the detrimental consequences of the pandemic. Among patients suffering from type 2 diabetes mellitus (DB), who are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19, VH might represent an even more serious threat. Therefore, our study focuses on identifying potential determinants of VH among patients with type 2 diabetes. Study participants (n = 1176) filled in a two-section online self-administered questionnaire, answering questions regarding demographic and anamnestic data, as well as their intention to accept any vaccination against COVID-19. Some possible reasons underlying VH were investigated as well. An overall hesitancy rate of 14.2% was registered. Data showed how older age, male gender, higher education level, and having been vaccinated for seasonal influenza in 2020–2021 were associated with a significantly higher propensity to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. On the contrary, having experienced adverse effects following past vaccinations was a negative predictor. In addition to confirming an array of predictors of VH, we found a worryingly high prevalence of VH among diabetics, who have been shown to be particularly exposed to severe COVID-19 and death. These findings may be useful in planning targeted action toward acceptance improvement and enhancing the efficacy of vaccination campaigns.

Vaccine hesitancy is a major threat to the success of COVID-19 vaccination programs. The present cross-sectional online survey of adult Poles (n = 1020) expressing a willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was conducted between February and March 2021 and aimed to assess (i) the general trust in different types of vaccines, (ii) the level of acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccines already in use in Poland (BNT162b2 by BioNTech/Pfizer, mRNA-1273 by Moderna and AZD1222 by Oxford/AstraZeneca) as well as eight vaccines approved outside European Union (EU) or in advanced stages of clinical trials, (iii) level of fear of vaccination against COVID-19, and (iv) main sources of information on COVID-19 vaccination. Among all major vaccine technology, the highest level of trust was observed for the mRNA platform, with a considerable number of surveyed (&gt, 20%) not aware of the existence of vaccines produced using the traditional approach (inactivated and live attenuated vaccines). The age of participants was the main factor differentiating the level of trust in a particular vaccine type. Both BNT162b and mRNA-1273 received a high level of acceptance, contrary to AZD1222. From eight vaccines unauthorized in the EU at the moment of study, the CVnCoV (mRNA, CureVac) was met with the highest level of trust, followed by Ad26.COV2.S (vector, Janssen/Johnson&amp, Johnson) and NVX-CoV2373 (protein, Novavax). Sputnik V (vector, Gamaleya Research Institute) was decidedly the least trusted vaccine. The median level of fear (measured by the 10-point Likert-type scale) in the studied group was 4.0, mostly related to the risk of serious allergic reactions, other severe adverse events and unknown long-term effects of vaccination. Female, individuals with a lower level of education and those not seeking any information on the COVID-19 vaccines revealed a higher fear of vaccination. Experts’ materials were the major source of information on COVID-19 vaccines in the studied group. The study shows the level of trust in COVID-19 vaccines can vary much across the producers while the mRNA vaccines are received with a high level of acceptance. It also emphasizes the need for effective and continuous science communication when fighting the pandemic as it may be an ideal time to increase the general awareness of vaccines.